Amy Hamm: Lorne Doerkson, end this woke nightmare

NEW WESTMINSTER, B.C. — If B.C. Conservative Party leader Lorne Doerkson becomes our next premier, he should endeavour to abolish the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT).

Sign In or Create an Account

The NDP is currently attempting to smear Doerkson with an accusation that he would do just that. Jinny Sims, the NDP candidate for Surrey-Panorama, posted to X about Doerkson this week: “This is scary. @LDoerkson leader of the @Conservative_BC voted in favour of abolishing our BC Human Rights Tribunal and the BC Human Rights Code. Along with 37 of his colleagues. Beware.”

Foremost, Sims’ accusation is misleading at best. There was no such legislature vote to abolish the BCHRT or Human Rights Code. In February 2026, independent MLA Tara Armstrong tabled a private member’s bill titled “Human Rights Code Repeal Act.” Her motion to table the bill did not pass first reading, with 50 of 87 MLAs voting in opposition. Doerkson was among the “yea” votes. This does not, in fact, establish that Doerkson definitively supported the bill’s contents, as the purpose of a vote at first reading is merely to decide if a given bill should be sent for second reading and a debate. The merits of a bill are not discussed at first reading.

Columnist Jesse Kline keeps you up to date with what’s happening in Israel and the effects of antisemitism on life here in Canada. Friday mornings.

By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Channel Israel will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

However, British Columbians should hope that Doerkson is indeed in favour of abolishing the BCHRT. It will be a glorious day when this star chamber’s far-left ideologues can no longer cast a pall over the lives of anyone who doesn’t subscribe to their “progressive” and intolerant orthodoxy.

That said, maybe we should, as the NDP suggests, “beware” anyone who wants to abolish the tribunal. After all, if we didn’t have the BCHRT, who would force physicians to administer puberty-blocking drugs to children against their conscience or medical expertise? Or decree that they hold jurisdiction over our online speech, thus allowing them to fine an elderly political dissident $750,000 for his perfectly legal expressions in opposition to gender ideology? And what if we didn’t have the BCHRT to allow a trans activist to file complaints against women for refusing to wax male testicles? How will the misgendered earn a living, if unable to win tens of thousands of dollars from their former employers — including hardworking small business owners — after having their feelings hurt? And what if a trans person is offended by an offhand comment made by their landlord, and friend, in a personal conversation? Or if a prisoner is similarly offended that police officers didn’t use their preferred pronouns? How will these persons seek financial compensation without their allies at the BCHRT?

Without the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, we would have to register for a gender studies program so as not to miss out on such profound feminist revelations as this, from a recent ruling that awarded $25,000 to a Vancouver woman briefly arrested at a traffic stop: “I accept that the ‘angry Black woman’ stereotype exists in Canada and that Black women are uniquely targeted by that stereotype.”

In all seriousness, it should be plainly obvious that B.C.’s human rights tribunal exists as little more than a venue for personal grievances and political agendas.

Any good that the BCHRT might offer in preventing or ameliorating genuine instances of discrimination in this province is profoundly outweighed by its regular unjust and absurd rulings. (Not to mention that the court system would be available for remedy in the tribunal’s absence.) We must also consider the secondary effects of each dubious case; for instance, the recent ruling against a family doctor, fined $28,100 for refusing to administer a puberty blocking drug to a child, occurs in the context of B.C.’s family doctor shortage and health-care crisis. There are 1.2 million of us without a family physician, according to the province. The BCHRT, by punishing overburdened doctors and stripping them of their right to conscientious objection, will only worsen the crisis. How could it not?

Similarly, each outrageous fine for small business owners or landlords in “misgendering” cases will certainly do no favours for housing affordability or B.C.’s struggling economy. Why open a business, or rent out your property, if you are potentially playing a game of woke minefield with each employee or tenant whose grievances are financially incentivized by the human rights tribunal?

Then there is perhaps the greatest threat that the BCHRT poses, which is to free our free expression. Who wants to risk sharing a heterodox opinion, or engaging in any kind free-spirited debate, in public or in private, knowing that it could result in one’s financial or reputational destruction? This is an intolerable situation that is not befitting of a democratic society.

NDP candidate Sims believes it is “scary” that Doerkson, if he becomes our next premier, might abolish the BCHRT. The truth is that we are already experiencing the “scary” situation, which will only end with the demise of the the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal. Here’s hoping that our next premier demonstrates the political will to make that happen.

National Post

This website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.